"players can play side by side on a TV or they can play remotely through the Internet using a Playstation or Xbox360." So you play the game with just a TV screen? No console or PC? Sweet. And you don't even need a PS3, you can play online with the playstation one!

MichaelR

@gamadaya: "Take Half Life, No More Heroes, Bioshock, Mass Effect, Goldeneye, all these violent games that are really fun because of the violence."

Um, no. Maybe the violence in it makes it fun for you, but for the vast majority of gamers, it is every else in those games that makes them great. Whether it's a rich world, an interesting story, a refreshing persepective- that is what those games are about. Yes, you kill people in those games, but that it is appropriate violence that furthers your immersion into the world and continues the story. If you remove the violence, those games would suffer for it, I'll give you that. But you make it sound like they are only quality titles because of their violence, which is simply not the case.

PurpleMonkey

@Sap_My_Sentry: So true sentry, it is all to rare a sight when an ACTUAL gods honest gamer who actually pay attention to the industry is taken seriously.

While I am sick at the nearly endless stream of crummy sports games and military shooters out there, I can't say that I haven't enjoyed a good many of them(COD and what not). However the ones that are considered classics are usually the ones that show more originality(Half-Life, Bioshock), meaning they offer something MORE than just "Hey your a marine! SHoot that guy and don't worry about a storyline!". Violence doesn't really appeal to me as much as creativity, and I'm pretty sure the majority of you can agree.

In short, if a game is fun and innovative, I wouldn't mind if it just so happened to have gore. It's all about where your focus lies

Namikus

Is it just me or did the Army of 2 Commercial manage to summarize everything that is immature and shameful about video games somehow? I was never that hype for the game, but even had I been before that Commercial, aimed squarely at the "Xtreme Permanent 12-year-old", I'd be far less enthused about it now.

DaiMacculate

@Ninja-Z: I agree, you can definitely portray powerful messages without violence, but I don't think what you described would qualify for the contest. It's not even allowed to have violent THEMES.

otakucode

I really have to hand it to these "experts" who seem to have a knowledge base of maybe 2 or 3 violent video games that they base their studies off of (e.g. Doom, Counter Strike, Halo 3). Yes, the market is over saturated with violent video games, but no notice is ever brought to the more creative titles. If this expert is asking for creativity, then look at titles like Little Big Planet, Super Mario Galaxy and Okami. He also misses the more provocative video games that include violence like Bioshock and Call of Duty 4. There are thought provoking games out there and these people seem to miss them or ignore them completely. Then again, bad press is good press.

D_DubDSU

@otakucode: It IS possible to convey a serious message in a way that isn't super-violent. In the same way that movies cut off screen when a murder occurs or imply it without showing it, video games can do the same. Now, I'm not saying all games have to do this, but for those who wish to, they can choose to focus on the causes and consequences of the serious issue. That's what I think this teen dating violence contest is trying to accomplish.

Ninja-Z

@riffleraffle: I certainly wasn't trying to be, riffleraffle. I didn't realize and I apologize if I came off that way. I just think it is a bad idea, possibly very bad, to try to teach people about something as serious and dangerous as teen dating violence without seriously jarring the person.

otakucode

@otakucode:
Jesus christ, dude. His daughter was murdered by an ex, don't be an ass.

riffleraffle

Yeah, there's a lot of violence in videogames. So what? It's not real and it doesn't affect anyone. They've looked and look for links between violent movies and games and all they come up with are half-ass misinterpreted studies that prove nothing but that they were wrong.

And why would you want to make a game illustrating teen dating violence without including violence? Have you ever, for instance, seen a mindless action movie with violence that's just no big deal (almost all games fit in that category) and then seen a movie where the violence kicks you in the gut and makes you think? If not, go find a copy of Funny Games and tell me the part where the camera sits there static for 3 minutes just starting, unmoving at the room after a violent scene isn't a godsend for giving you the chance to catch your breath. Violence in fiction can be used very effectively to convey ideas related to violence, such as how it affects the people involved. There are very few games that seek to engage the player in this way, and I'd say there are none that do it with the complete success that directors like Michael Haneke are able, but that is no reason to prevent creators from trying. I could imagine a game that springs teen dating violence on your suddenly in such a way that it makes you cry or feel sick - THAT would get your point across. And if you don't want the game to be that disturbing, you should ask yourself just what the fuck you're trying to convey by cleaning up the image of teen dating violence!

otakucode

@Voteforme2020: I think your issue here deals with a hatred of modern movies, which is understandable but strays from the subject at hand (And also, just as a side note, MGS is based primarily off of Escape from New York / Snake Plisskin. Rambo is no spy.)

But the thing about what you're saying is that the games you put under those categories meet your criteria, but with the exception of Nintendogs, I don't think the general public is aware of Silent Hill, FFX, or Portal (which labeling under comedy is quite a stretch). Try to look at things from a non-gamer perspective and you will see that your list of potential game purchases is limited to quite a few choices, most of which are currently on the Wii or PS2.

Now there are two possible solutions to that problem. 1) Heavily advertise games such as those you have listed in the future so that the public is more aware of their existence. Halo 3 did this pretty well, but its gaming audience primarily consisted of those who played 1+2 and it falls under the aforementioned shooter. However, heavy advertising of more unorthodox games a la Endless Ocean could accomplish the marketing craze that accompanied Halo 3 on a much broader scale. This brings me to 2) Follow Nintendo's lead. Game companies don't need to make a new controller, but they could at the least take into account what non-gamers want. I know you fear that gaming might lose its fun if it rose to the level of Hollywood and all, but if gaming wishes to achieve diversity in the eyes of every person, gamer or non-gamer, then games like Endless Ocean and Wii Sports are going to need a push.

Which brings me full circle to the point of this article: blood is not a bad thing in itself. Lots of successful games don't have blood, but when compared to the number of high-ranked games that are shooters or in some way involve blood, we need to consider finding the perfect balance between the two. It's not as distinct a divide as is the case with casual and hardcore gaming, but it's something that game developers need to master if they're going to appeal to all parts of the market. That's what I think, though. I like 80's flicks as much as the next guy, but I don't think modern Hollywood is as despicable as you make it out to be. Same applies to video games.

Ninja-Z

@ZonzoMaster: :D Np.. and by the by, I play Nintendogs, too.. Just not as much as my girlfriend. -.-

Voteforme2020

@Voteforme2020: Nintendogs? Chick game? There's ladies that play COD4 you know. Don't generalize, now I'll have to play Nintendogs to prove the opposite of what you are implying, I hope you are happy.

P.S. Thanks for the excuse, I need a new game.

ZonzoMaster

@Voteforme2020: To futher elaborate: movies, or at least passion, hope, the daring nature, and fantasy in movies died in the 80s.

Voteforme2020

@Ninja-Z: Comedy: Portal, romance: Final Fantasy X, drama: just about every Silent Hill game. Here, I'll throw an extra one out, chick game: Nintendogs (that is sooooo a chick game :P). They're there, it's just that gamers focus more on violent video games... but there's less violent video games than there is nonviolent video games. It's obvious what gamers want.

Also, about the movies, welcome to the year 2008.. Movies aren't the same as the ones MGS was based off of.. games are influenced by the golden age of the 80s.. Gears of War is basically a 80s movie in shinny drag. Metal Gear Solid is Rambo mixed with James Bond (so, not just 80s). Hollywood dislikes these movies now, because they had a 90s remake.. I hate the 90s. D:< But MGS couldn't be made into a critically acclaimed film for todays critics. Snake would have to break down in cry to have any "depth".

Voteforme2020

Anyone want to get in contact with the supposed "expert"?

michael.hoechsmann@mcgill.ca

:D

Be nice.

TRUTH_the_anti-anti-drug

@Voteforme2020: I never said video games have to imitate movies. I'm saying they should find a similar level of acceptance in the eyes of the media. Yes, there are lots of nonviolent games, and many do sell well (GH3, Sims, Wii Sports, etc.). but when you think about it, video games still haven't mastered the range and diversity that many other mediums hold. We've got romance novels, chick flicks, and ballads, but I've yet to see a video game take on the topic of love in such a way that can find wide acceptance. Same applies to the comedy genre, drama genre, etc.

I don't want video games do exactly as the movies do, but there is so much ground that video games have yet to cover, and in many cases violence would only be detrimental to achieving acceptance and a greater versatility. Not all games have to use gun-toting heroes to be great. Those game can exist, but we can have more than just that.

I also find it funny that you claim that Metal Gear Solid would be ridiculed if it were compared to movies, because that is pretty much what it is designed to be - an interactive movie. That's not a bad thing, mind you, but your vehement opposition to equating games with movies seems pretty silly when both mediums often mix and intertwine, albeit with varying results.

Ninja-Z

@Ninja-Z: Well, maybe these people need to accept the end product as it is. If they can't, and want games to be more like movies, maybe they should watch a movie. Games are already on the level of a movies, novels and music it's own respective way. There are tons of nonviolent games, and many of them sell well. But, Fox picks violent video games for headlines, and they could give damn about whether it's the majority or not. Do you honestly think that'll change in our time. They could make only one violent game next year, and that violence game would get the most attention... Wake up.

They choose to run stories about Gears of War, Mass Effect and Grand Theft Auto because it furthers their agenda. They could put stories up about Sims.. oh wait, they only did that when there was the "nude skin" hootblah. Games can remain as violent as they want, and this generation will still qualify them as art because they play them and love them. It's all politics, and most news stations play to an old crowd that have a low opinion about games already. Do you think a Republican-leaning magazine would report good stories on Obama and Hilary? No, it's against their base!

Also, what's with this need to make games on par with movies and novels and music? No.. Just no.. They play to different audience, and this is how it should be. Can you imagine Metal Gear Solid in this world of "games are on par with blah, blah, blah".. It would be ridiculed and defamed. And this is the rock, the fact that we can't mix our company with Hollywood elites because our games are more.. you know, fun. Movies stopped being fun a long time ago in the pursuit of being "serious artist"... I don't want to see this happen to games.

Voteforme2020

@Voteforme2020: But you seem to forget that not every gamer doesn't care if a game has blood. Game developers "should" strive for a great game, but that doesn't mean that they should carelessly throw blood in half-hazardly. Not all games, good or terrible, can appeal to all gamers, so the target audience plays a role in how a game is designed.

Which is what this article boils down to: most hyped games deal with violent subject matter, and often times these violent games are the ones that get shown on Fox News and CNN. If video games are going to be accepted as a medium on the level of movies, books, and music, then you have to have something for everything. The average Halo player may not enjoy Endless Ocean, but your grandma might, and it's that diversity that blood prevents.

Ninja-Z

@Ninja-Z: No, they need to make great games, and if the game is soaked in blood, then it's just all the redder.

Voteforme2020

This is a big generalization but with some truth. It's not entirely the video game industry's fault, the film industry is also at fault here. You see... the popular violent games, that are constantly criticized by the media, are in many ways imitations of violent films. So if film makers and movie studious get more creative with their productions, then naturally violent games would show a bit more wittiness to go with some "HD" blood and gore. In the end it's a lot easier to imitate than to create. You want to save your money for the shiny visuals and spend the least amount of money on writing and planing. Oh yeah! Always go with a cheesy plot for an 80's movie that's been use over and over again, because you know... someone is bound to get it right one of these days.

phextin

I think they forgot it's called "April Fools" because it's in APRIL - NOT MARCH.

Dorphat the Insomniac

@Voteforme2020: I think you took the article a little too much at face value. The author isn't saying that all violence is bad; it's simply pointing out that today, a lot of attention is given to the violent games (Halo 3, GTA, etc.) and that non-violent games should get equal representation too. Granted, we're currently in a time where the Wii is a huge fad and there are more E games than M, but news favors violent games and review magazines do show a preference to shooters. The bottom line is that game developers need to focus more on pushing non-violent games forward to balance out the violence.

Ninja-Z

Maybe saying gamers are violent because they play violent games is kind of like saying Al Pacino is a coke-sniffin gun-totin Cuban immigrant in the eigthies.

StartRunning

@jayntampa: That's a completely awesome point.

Gouki4u

Sorry, no. How exactly can he define what's imaginative? What games is he looking out? I think Metal Gear is a shinning beacon of creativity... and it's violent! Maybe he should stick to watching movies or reading novels.. let us deal with video games and their problems, mister expert. >.>

On a different note, what's wrong with violence? Violence is great and I love it. Leave it alone. I wanna waterboard people in a middle eastern nation for the soul reason that they didn't have the foresight to be born in my nation (or one of it's many allies). Also, video games and violence is like rap and violence...

Voteforme2020

@greyhoundbus: @ibelli: well said, guys.

Evil Tortie's Mom

A friend of mine is a woman. She hates video games. Not because they lack creativity, or elements of art, but because they are, nowadays, mostly about some kind of violence, specifically killing digital images of human beings. At first I protested, naming a few games that I though didn't depict characters causing digital harm to other characters. I came up with the sports genre, excluding boxing, and football, that was pretty much the only leg I had to stand on. That and the few puzzle games and racing games that were out there. Shes is really excited for (little Big Planet)

The point is, shes right. Think about it: do we need to kill people in games in order to enjoy them? If you look at sales charts for games by genre and I think you will see the point.

Can developers afford to risk being more creative and still be financially viable? Racism and sexism aside, pure physical violence is a mainstay in videogames that I think that the industry needs to take a serious look at.

ibelli

It seems like sexism and racism are far more prevalent in video games than in other forms of consumer media. Yet, it often goes unchallenged.. hmm, actually there was this one article I once remember reading about tomb raider and how games are perpetuating sexism that we already see in other forms of media. So one may ask.. are games creating racism and sexism? or a reflection on the racism and sexism in our society? (even if so, it wouldn't justify having sexism and racism in games)

indigo

@Gouki4u:

Heh, same here. I don't sit with my back to a window or door, I take wide arcs around entrances to alleyways, I carry *some* kind of weapon with me at all times (preferrably a cane), and I don't like people touching me. I think I got more of the crazy than you :p

I myself prefer more rhythm and music and puzzle games to shooters... though fighting games reign over them all. Truthfully, the consumer's gotta fix it at their end before the publishers are willing to do anything about it. How many non-violent videogames do any of you guys purchase in comparison to violent ones? How often do you actually go looking for non violent videogames, or promote them to your friends? Everyone keeps tell me I need to get COD 4 or God of War, but no one ever really suggests Okami.

WFROSE_Ex_Alpha

Oh man. I just read your website. :(

riffleraffle

personally, i see the prevalence of violence in video-games more of a mirror held up to human psychology than a lack of imagination on the part of developers.

in my opinion all the research i've read on the human mind would point to threat being the only real psychological state available to be exploited by games (other than loss of something that you've become emtionally attached to. eg: death scene, ff7 and the whole challenge/reward, obsessional collecting/hording/achievement-whoring thing). and that i feel is a deficiency of our evolved brains rather than a deficiency of imagination in game design.

anyway, nothing made me consider the whole violent videogame/densensitivity debate more than when i was watching a film the other day and found myself wincing and looking away during the more violent parts and i've spent my life playing violent videogames. go figure.

yarr

Obviously what games need, is more imaginative ways of being violent :D

Lokku

@TheSonicGamer: Well said.

Another point about violent games: I'm a pacifist in real life. I just don't think people should be killing or hurting one another. It accomplishes nothing. Yet, in games, I'm as downright sadistic as the game allows me to be. Yet, even after multi-hour killing sprees, I feel no urge to hurt any real people.

Add this to the fact that I've been playing violent games since Wolf 3D, and you see why I think mature content is a non-issue.

ShaggE

Violence in videogames is more disturbing to outsiders because of the interactive nature of it. A movie or tv, less so, because there is none of the implicit "choosing to do so" involved. Even if other mediums do glorify violence, it's quite easy to see how the interactivty of videogames can possibly be a step up from a non-interactive experience.

I personally can attest that I prefer playing a videogame over watching something on TV precisely because there's something about the immersive nature of interactiveness that makes the experience more interesting. While we should try to explain how that no more gives us tendencies toward real violence than a tv show, it helps to qualify ourselves by admitting that the immersion factor is a little higher for a videogame.

When we say "But look at movies and tv" without that qualifier, it tells outsiders "well, gee they're so immersed in their videogames that they can't tell the difference", and it doesn't help our argument.

greyhoundbus

Hmm....how about the complete and total lack of imagination in hollywood instead?....Yes there is violence in some games...whoopdee doo. Give me a break! I wish these goons would realize that some games ,just like some MOVIES, are not meant for children. I dont remember hearing anyone complain and demanding that the most violent film I ever saw (the new Rambo movie) be pulled. Arrrghh.... Hypocrites!

gaiking

Violence in video games...
Sometimes I wonder how wrong we are to be so defensive. Not that this person or anyone of a similar ilke is right, I just wonder if we should consider a middle ground...

Zeouterlimits

I'm sick of this whole debate.

I mean, really, video game violence? It's totally useless! Guy's like JT ramble on and on about how killers train on video games. Let's take an example.

I play Call of Duty 4 for 40 hours *I think I already have*

I learn that...

1. Reloading guns looks alot more complicated then it should be.

2. Grenades dont wait for you to throw them.

3. People dont wait for you to kill them.

Where is the game where you get to stomp through a school and shoot at helpless students? Not that a game like that would even be enjoyable. And even then, it wouldnt help that much in training you. No, the games that JT attack so often are games that show you that unless you were a cat and had 9 lives, you'd be dead before you do any serious damage. I cant count how many times I've died in COD4. If anything, it's shown me that I should hide behind a crate and wait for my teammates to fight off any resistance.

Now, sure, I wouldnt be surprised if a violent game makes you slightly more violent. SLIGHTLY. But in all seriousness, all a violent game teaches you are basic techniques to flank opponents who are firing you. Yes, who are ACTUALLY FIGHTING BACK.

Now I wish, JT and then rest of them would shut up. If a violent game doesnt make some whacko go insane, some violent movie will, then. So stop singeling out video games! If anything, it's taught me that I wouldnt survive 10 seconds on the battlefield!

TheSonicGamer

Violence isn't always a replacement for imagination. They can go hand in hand just fine.

ShaggE

I found it a bit unusual that the article was in the business section.

Pulse

I can't read any article that discusses violence in video games without also analyzing violence in movies and on television.

It's like arguing that breakfast cereals have too much sugar, while ignoring the existence of candy and soda.

big_world

@JustThisGuy: @Camzor: read day note. feel informed.

thejakeman: probably disagrees with you

You know what question I've always wanted to ask video game experts? I want to ask, "How many games have you completed?"

I mean, can you imagine an expert on Shakespeare saying, "Well, I've never actually read Hamlet, but I've observed people reading it."

jayntampa

@Uzilover: "Tis true , we need more Katamari's and less macho shit. - Uzilover" Oh, the irony.

ElReyMysterioso-PBUH

Why whenever someone is an "expert on violent video games" they are the people condemning them and never people who actually know anything about them like Kotaku?

Sap_My_Sentry

Drew? Who is that?

Camzor

Thanks Canada. Late to the party as always.

Yahto

I never sit with my back to the door in a restaurant, and I'm not a mercenary. Does that make me crazy?

While I enjoy pretend violence, and don't think there is anything inherently wrong with violent video games I will admit violence is the easy way out for developers, but the fact is Halo 3 appeals to many more gamers than Catan. Making a nonviolent game means taking a chance, and investors prefer sure bets to big risks.

Gouki4u

Slightly off-topic question: who are you? That is, who is Drew Crecente? It's the first time I've seen the name.

JustThisGuy

Tis true , we need more Katamari's and less macho shit.

Uzilover

It's the battle between Drew and Maggie. Who will post the most articles today. Stay tuned for more.

MoeB

Hahaha, I like this guy. I remember this article from a GP. He's not exactly right. I own many more non violent games than violent games, but I do love the violence. It's just how it is. People like killing, fighting, and guns. I don't know why, but I know it's true. Doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it. Most violent games aren't too original, but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with violent games themselves. Take Half Life, No More Heroes, Bioshock, Mass Effect, Goldeneye, all these violent games that are really fun because of the violence.

gamadaya

I would like to state that it isn't a lack of imagination in the games industry that leads to so many violent games, it's a lack of balls.

Let me explain: game companies are afraid of taking chances on unique games, but there are plenty of creative game developers that would happily create myriad games lacking violence or guns ... the question is, would a publisher devote the money and resources to development and marketing in the same manner as they would a game like "Army of Two." No, of course not.

They sell to the lowest common denominator, like the article states, "He said it is easier to translate violence to another culture than it is to translate humour."

Violence is easier than something much more subtle. Again, this is why I'm so against an organization like EA gobbling up every small competitor. A small developer can take a chance, a large one won't.

jayntampa

I always love it when someone claims to be an expert at something.. Hey guys i'm an expert at listening to music...and i tell you these song writers are tottally umimagitive.

Raziel3333

One thing he's right about is the lack of game developer imagination...I wouldnt say it's tremendous, as he did, but it is true that the vast majority of games released are unoriginal and often dull. There are, however, more than enough fantastic and original games to help us overlook this.
These violent gaming haters have to realize that we don't buy a game because it's violent, as they think we do. We buy a game because it's fun. If it's original, that's even more incentive.

squidboy007

Oh Canada...

NoBullet

Yep, I read this in The Gazette yesterday. It's an interview of some McGill professor that claims to be an expert on video game violence. *rolls eyes*

Lancehead

I don't mind violence as long as it's in the right context and is tasteful. But senseless, unwarranted violence in video games usually give the whole industry a bad wrap. I guess I'm the minority that doesn't care too much about graphic violence in games. Also do fighting games count as violence or are they talking about gore?

Sonjool

Why do we always go after the person who wants to tackle this issue, their characters and credentials rather than the issue. I'm getting sick of violence in games. Not because it's "bad", because I'm bored of it. It's tiresome. So many games are violent, especially if you follow the strict definition of what violence is. Remember, even Mario has blood on his hands. In each game he goes on a murderous rampage of koopas. :)

Seriously, though, I think this issue warrants discussion. Why aren't we seeing more Viva Pinatas? More RollerCoaster Tycoons? More Katamaris? We need these types of games, not just because they help to ensure a sane violent to non-violent game ratio for those that don't like violent games or want their kids exposed to them. But more importantly, it would be nice to just have some variety. Is that asking too much?

DSGamerGWJ

Violence, eh?

The Sims (most popular franchise ever, I think)
Sports franchise games
Racing Games
Casual Games (fastest growing gaming segment)

Violent video games are a segment of the industry, nothing more. I play all things HL2 on my PC, I have Metroid on my Wii. Most of the other games I own are either non-violent or cartoon violent (Mario)

My favorite game so far this year was Endless Ocean. On the other side of the coin, I'm jazzed about Super Smash Bros.

If people don't like violent video games, they shouldn't buy them. They are LOADS of great games that do not fit into the category "violent", there are loads of great games that are humerous and creative.

Real lack of creativity is how the press covers the broad spectrum of video game experience by focusing on one aspect of it.

wildcard6

@fadecy: *than

fadecy

I'd prefer to own 10 Little Big Planet type games that COD4 type games. They're nice but They're way too similar. They just have a different look and a few tweaks. Atleast fighting games have different systems of combat. For example SSBB and VF5 are completely different games but in the same genre. I think it does show a lack of imagination and that a company is not willing to take a risk. I really should buy assassin's creed soon. I support games that take a risk and are origional. I mean... Sure bioshock was origional. But in all essence you're still shooting and killing stuff. Somebody make a rythm shooter!

fadecy